Emergency medicine Australasia : EMA · 2025
Accuracy of colour Doppler ultrasound for nasogastric tube placement in emergency department: A prospective observational study.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ong Ming Yee, Ahmad Zahedi Ahmad Zulkarnain, Zambri Aliyah, Noor Azhar Muhaimin, Bustam Aida, Mohd Alip Rabiha, Yahya Mohammad Fadhly, Poh Khadijah
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Nasogastric tube (NGT) placement is a common procedure in EDs. Successful NGT placement reduces complications such as aspiration pneumonia, pneumothorax and mortality. While chest radiography is the gold standard for confirmation, colour Doppler ultrasonography (CDU) has demonstrated high accuracy. As its applicability in the ED remains underexplored, the present study evaluates the accuracy of CDU in confirming NGT placement in the ED.
METHODS: A prospective observational study was conducted in a tertiary hospital ED from October 2022 to October 2023. Adult patients requiring NGT insertion were eligible. NGT placement was performed using a standardised protocol and confirmed with CDU and chest radiography. Accuracy of CDU was assessed against chest radiography, and procedural times for confirmation were compared using the Kruskal-Wallis H test.
RESULTS: Of 157 patients screened, 144 were included. CDU demonstrated 92.45% (95% confidence interval 85.67-96.69) sensitivity, 80.56% (63.98-91.81) specificity, positive predictive value 0.93 (0.88-0.96), negative predictive value 0.78 (0.64-0.88), positive likelihood ratio 4.75 (2.44-9.27) and negative likelihood ratio 0.09 (0.05-0.19). The median (interquartile range) confirmation times were 3.0 min (2.0-3.0) for CDU and 42.0 min (30.0-55.0) for radiography (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: CDU should not currently be used as a standalone method for confirming NGT placement due to its limitations and risk of false-positive results. Further research is required to address these challenges before considering its clinical implementation.
METHODS: A prospective observational study was conducted in a tertiary hospital ED from October 2022 to October 2023. Adult patients requiring NGT insertion were eligible. NGT placement was performed using a standardised protocol and confirmed with CDU and chest radiography. Accuracy of CDU was assessed against chest radiography, and procedural times for confirmation were compared using the Kruskal-Wallis H test.
RESULTS: Of 157 patients screened, 144 were included. CDU demonstrated 92.45% (95% confidence interval 85.67-96.69) sensitivity, 80.56% (63.98-91.81) specificity, positive predictive value 0.93 (0.88-0.96), negative predictive value 0.78 (0.64-0.88), positive likelihood ratio 4.75 (2.44-9.27) and negative likelihood ratio 0.09 (0.05-0.19). The median (interquartile range) confirmation times were 3.0 min (2.0-3.0) for CDU and 42.0 min (30.0-55.0) for radiography (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: CDU should not currently be used as a standalone method for confirming NGT placement due to its limitations and risk of false-positive results. Further research is required to address these challenges before considering its clinical implementation.